If I were in charge ...

tesco samoa · #1 April 10th, 2002, 06:29 PM

If I was in charge of the U.S.

1. Decentralize the Food industry
2. FDA would take over all food and beverage related tasks and the approprate funding for inspections and punishments would be granted.
3. Limit all government donations to 800 $ and under by people. And zero donations from companies in a calander year.
4. Limit election time to 6 months from the call of an election to day the new party takes over.
5. Force states to equalize the tax spending for each county. No more poor area's get shafted.
6. Declare that U.S. laws are only for U.S. and not force them down the rest of the worlds throats.
7. Repeal the U.S.A. Pat bill.
8. Stop santions on Iraq and Cuba
9. Uphold the constitution for a change
10. Make corperations responsible for their actions.
11. Make politicians responsible for their actions.
12. Ban hand guns
13. Save the whales.

dmm · #2 April 10th, 2002, 08:01 PM

quote:
Originally posted by tesco samoa:
1. Decentralize the Food industry
2. FDA would take over all food and beverage related tasks and the approprate funding for inspections and punishments would be granted.

These are not quite opposite, but seem to represent opposite idealogical positions. I take it you mean, "Decentralize food production" and "Centralize food inspection." That will get expensive. Of course, if you were in charge then you could do that, but can you explain why?

quote:

3. Limit all government donations to 800 $ and under by people. And zero donations from companies in a calander year.
4. Limit election time to 6 months from the call of an election to day the new party takes over.
5. Force states to equalize the tax spending for each county. No more poor area's get shafted.
9. Uphold the constitution for a change

#3, #4, & #5 appear to be incompatible with #9. But I guess if you were in charge then you could modify things a bit.

quote:

7. Repeal the U.S.A. Pat bill.

What is that?

quote:

8. Stop santions on Iraq and Cuba

Cuban sanctions will be ending soon. Castro won't be cold in the grave before Cuba becomes a free-wheeling democratic capitalist tourist attraction, with a bit of a socialist bent. Unfortunately for Iraq, Saddam appears to be in fine fettle.

quote:

10. Make corperations responsible for their actions.
11. Make politicians responsible for their actions.

Including you? You're in charge remember!

quote:

12. Ban hand guns

You'll get mine out of my cold dead fist. That kind of policy leads to dictators like yourself.

quote:

13. Save the whales.

Yeah, but how? Nuke the Japanese and Scandinavians?

dmm · #3 April 10th, 2002, 08:16 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Cyrien:

US Pop 288 mil
Europe Pop 727 mil (all European Coutries)
Added together = A little over 1 billion

China Pop 1.386 billion Standing Army about 300mil

Can those asking us to lay off China, please explain why China has a standing army of 300 million?

As for me, Cyrien's further point about nukes being the only way to stop such an army goes far to explain China's current interest in expanding their stock of ICBMs at a time when Russia and US are both cutting their nukes way back.

Cyrien · #4 April 10th, 2002, 08:44 PM

quote:
Originally posted by dmm:

Can those asking us to lay off China, please explain why China has a standing army of 300 million?

Probably to keep the other 1 billion of their population in line. Just a guess though. I don't think anyone has really asked them.

quote:

As for me, Cyrien's further point about nukes being the only way to stop such an army goes far to explain China's current interest in expanding their stock of ICBMs at a time when Russia and US are both cutting their nukes way back.

Well the Chinese still have WAY less nukes than either of these nations. About as many as an SDI defense system could stop. Which if implemented has brought a promise from the Chinese to increase their own nuclear arsenal to a point where our SDI system couldn't stop it. Such an action would probably prompt many Chinese neighbors to increase or create their own nuclear arms. Specially Pakistan and India. Gee... some of the people I most want to see have large stockpiles of nukes (even ones declared to be for peaceful civilian construction projects). Well. Perhaps if they do have large stockpiles it would stop military conflicts in those regions. No one wants to be nuked after all...

wr8th · #5 April 10th, 2002, 08:56 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Cyrien:

Perhaps if they do have large stockpiles it would stop military conflicts in those regions. No one wants to be nuked after all...

I appreciate the sarcasm, especially when you consider how many people died in Western India after that mosque was demolished and a trainful of Hindus were set on fire as retaliation.

"Here's a blowtorch kid. Go play in that dynamite factory next to the munitions dump!"

Krsqk · #6 April 11th, 2002, 05:17 AM

quote:
originally posted by Cyrien:
Well the Chinese still have WAY less nukes than either of these nations. About as many as an SDI defense system could stop. Which if implemented has brought a promise from the Chinese to increase their own nuclear arsenal to a point where our SDI system couldn't stop it.

That's about the only promise I'd trust them to keep. They'll also increase their nuclear arsenal if we keep ours the same, or if we cut it back, or if we dance in circles on a pile of banana peels. (I seem to remember that their nukes weren't able to reach the U.S. until sometime during the Last administration. Hmmm...) I trust the Chinese government exactly as much as "I-speak-peace-in-English-but-I-say-kill-the-Jews-in-Arabic" Arafat. Both say whatever they need to in order to get the proper response from the mass media in this country, while going right ahead with their own plans.

Askan Nightbringer · #7 April 11th, 2002, 05:57 AM

quote:
Originally posted by dmm:

Can those asking us to lay off China, please explain why China has a standing army of 300 million?

Now I'm going to be quite frank on this statement.
Where the hell did you hear that toss?
Is that what George W is spouting to justify US military expenditure to about a gizzillion times the rest of the world?

Doing some hasty research on the internet (always a reliable source of information *cough*) I see the size of their army is more like 3 million, but may have been reduced to 2.5 million in 2000. (And even then that number comes from biased western web sites trying to make a point about the threat China poses) Although this seems like a mind boggling large number (coming from someone in a country less that 20 mil) to do a truthful analysis of the threat I would need to know
1) The standing armies from US, Indonesia and any other countries with lots of troops.
2) Are the police services considered part of the Chinese military? The CIA website seems to think they are.
3) What's military expediture? % of GDP? We all know who "wins" that one.
4) What are Chinese goals? They don't seem to be particularly aggresive in foreign policy (expect Taiwan...which they don't really consider foreign). Imagine what would have happened if a Chinese spy plane was caught moving along the Atlantic coast.
5) Will China really go head to head against USA? Russia never did...the cold war always seemed to have had "agreed" theatres of war. Did russian troops ever really fight american ones?

The chinese are fine, they just want what most people want and thats to live in peace.

Askan

PS. tigga, I think your perception of australian girls has more to do with jealousy or maybe they all just refused your advances. or maybe its that whinging pom syndrome